Monthly Archives: December 2012

Someone for David Cameron to listen to

I have just been visiting someone that I think it would be good for David Cameron to meet. A lovely lady in her 90's. One of her daughters recently died and we were talking about a whole range of things from her life.

She started talking about her husband who died many years ago. I thought of David Cameron when she described her husbands war experiences and how they affected him. In his Christmas speech our Prime Minister mentioned ""Indeed, God's word reminds us that Jesus was the Prince of Peace." Odd words to preceed talking about service men and women who are at war. Odd words from a Prime Minister who travels to oppressive regimes in the Middle East to sell arms.

I wish he could have heard this lovely lady on the subject of peace.

She described how after the war her husband would sob in her arms as he could not escape memories of standing on the bodies of his comrades, of seeing them die.

She said war solves nothing.

If only our government listened to people like this lady. People who have been trough tough times and come out knowing that violence only breeds hatred and more violence. The only answer she said is love.

What is more, that is of course what Jesus said and lived as well. The politicians of the day killed him for it. Today they simply twist his words to justify their terrible actions.

David Cameron, get in touch if you want me to introduce you to a lady who will help you understand the consequences of your choices.

UCCF contradicts itself on Women speaking

The UCCF have quietly updated the following news release UCCF: The Christian Unions – Student – News – UCCF Statement on Women speaking in Christian Unions.

I have added paragraph numbers below, otherwise this is taken from their website on 8/12/12

[1]CUs are at liberty to invite speakers (male or female) who will maintain the unity reflected in the Basis of Faith, but it would be wholly against the spirit and intention of the UCCF Basis of Faith and the advice of UCCF staff if an individual CU devised a policy not to have women speakers for some or all of their events.

[2]The Bristol CU is utterly committed to reflecting the core biblical truth of the fundamental equality of women and men as they resolve this matter. This is a sensitive issue and the recent email exchange has revealed the internal processes of an undergraduate CU trying to think their way clear on a subject that Church denominations around the world have struggled with.

UPDATE – 07/12/12

[3]UCCF should like to stress that the choice of any speaker is made by each individual; student run CU. UCCF does not have preferred speaker lists or undesirable speaker lists. Neither do we take a view on the complementarian/egalitarian debate. UCCF has staff and students in both camps and everywhere in between; we therefore cannot have a policy of ‘No women speakers’ nor a policy of ‘you must have women speakers’.

[4]UCCF continues to support students as they lead CUs in a manner that reflects the unity and purpose of our Basis of Faith.

In particular the following 2 sentences (last of para 1 and last of para 3) seem to directly contradict each other:

it would be wholly against the spirit and intention of the UCCF Basis of Faith and the advice of UCCF staff if an individual CU devised a policy not to have women speakers for some or all of their events.

I understand this to mean that if a CU decides on a policy of no women speakers then they will have only been ablke to do so against the UCCF Basis of Faith and against the advice of UCCF staff. In other words UCCF has a policy that their staff will advise against a policy in a CU of no women speakers.

Yet in the update

we therefore cannot have a policy of ‘No women speakers’ nor a policy of ‘you must have women speakers’.

we see the UCCF now claiming that it cannot have a policy that CU's must have women speakers.

In summary the UCCF now say that have not got a policy that CU's must have women speakers so how can they still say that not having women speakers would go against their Basis of Faith and the advice of their staff?

Better anti-RAPE campaigns

This is appalling A seasonal warning on rape? Don't ask a Met policeman | Zoe Williams | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Why can't we make things clear:

Without a freely, deliberately and consciously given YES then all sex is RAPE.

There is no such thing as an invitation to RAPE

There is no excuse for RAPE nobody deserves it

The survivor of rape is not to blame, by definition they did not ask for it.
Rape campaigns should target the people who commit rape not the people who are raped.